Calling guns, you don't like “military grade” or “military style” only reveals how ignorant you are.

That's right, here I go “gunsplaining” again, to the great disdain of several MSM figures who are complaining that gun control organizations and their fans shouldn't be held to a minimal standard of knowledge on the subject they endlessly pontificate on

Silly me, how dare I expect the people screaming the loudest to severely restrict my rights have any clue what they are talking about!

When gun control organizations and supporters use phrases like “military grade” and “military-style” to describe firearms they want to ban; they have helpfully provided a gigantic clue that they are willfully ignorant idiots. Idiots that have no credibility, but unfortunately must still be taken seriously as enemies due to the oversized microphone they are granted by their sycophantic supporters in the media.

First, the history of firearms has always included crossovers between the civilian world and military world and back again. Its been that way for centuries. Certainly for the 243 years that have passed since the revolutionary war. The rebels and colonists often armed themselves with a “Pennsylvania” or “Kentucky” long rifle that had three times the range, as well as far greater accuracy, than the far more common “Brown Bess Musket” used by both the British and colonial armies. In fact, George Washington opposed raising large numbers of riflemen in the colonial army as formal troops. These “long rifles” were the state-of-the-art in rifle technology for their time.

Colonists also owned cannons and even armed coastal warships. The cannons were leased or sold to the fledgling US government /colonial army, and Congress issued “Letters of Marque” authorizing citizens to use their privately owned and armed warships to target British supply ships along the east coast of the colonies.

After the civil war, pistols like the Colt navy and Colt army revolvers were the “go to standard” sidearm for cowboys, ranchers, Law enforcement and just about everyone else that owned or carried a gun.

In the 20th century, two iconic firearms were again used by and cherished by both the government (military, law enforcement) and citizens. I'm speaking of course of both the Thompson submachine gun and the Colt 1911 pistol

Fixed cartridge revolvers were adopted as sidearms by the military for the first time in 1873. Beginning in the 1950’s, Colt and Smith and Wesson .38 special revolvers were issued to military pilots and other aircrews at the same time they were in use by law enforcement from the federal level all the way down to local police and were again quite common with citizens.

Colt AR15 Sporter Ad

Contrary to popular belief, the AR15 rifle was developed by Armalite’s Eugene Stoner for citizens. Colt bought the design and started marketing the AR15 as the “Colt Sporter” several years before the Air-force adopted the M16 at the behest of General Curtis Lemay. And the AR15 has never been used by the military.

The US Army M24 sniper rifle is built on the chassis of one of the most common “hunting rifles” ever developed or sold, the Remington 700 .308 bolt action rifle.

The Barrett .50 cal rifle was introduced to the citizen market in the early 1980s and rapidly adopted by long range competition shooters competing in national and international matches. It was noticed by military participants of these matches, and it was then adopted by militaries around the world for their specific uses.

In 1986 the US military moved to the Beretta 92 in 9mm as their standard issue sidearm across all branches, at a time when the firearm was also popular with law enforcement and popularized by movies like Die Hard and Lethal Weapon. Specific select military spec-ops units and law enforcement Units did and still do retain use of the Colt 1911. Its design and base frame is also incredibly popular on the competition shooting circuit both nationally and internationally.

Girandoni Rifle

I could go on and on and on with other countless examples, but you get the point of how dumb these talking heads are.

And I haven't even gone into Supreme Court decisions such as US V Miller in 1939, where the Supreme Court correctly ruled that weapons particularly well suited for military or militia service are protected by the Second Amendment. Nor have I mentioned the various writings and debates of the Founding Fathers, whos' stated intent was for American citizens to each be as individually well armed as any government soldier would be. Or at least as close to that standard as possible.

Take for instance the words of Tench Coxe, Founding Father and delegate from Pennsylvania to the Continental Congress. “Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords and every terrible implement of the soldier are the birthrights of Americans. “ Tench Coxe 1788

The bottom line is, phrases like “military grade” and “military style” are, like the rest of the arguments used by gun control, nothing more than utterly meaningless marketing buzzwords.

Josh Sugarmann

Used in a deliberate attempt to sway public opinion by intentionally misrepresenting things. A tactic pioneered by the exec director of the Violence Policy Center Josh Sugarmann, who famously bragged about his intent and stated goal to confuse the public by redefining semi-automatic rifles that shared only a physical appearance with full auto ones as so-called “Assault Weapons.”

So the next time you hear some media talking head, gun control fan or “student activist” publicly revealing their ignorance, you can share these verifiable facts with them. Or even ask them if handguns, shotguns and bolt action rifles, all used by the military are also “military grade”. But take appropriate precautions, their heads might explode from rage, frustration or both.

More articles, commentary and information by D. Roberts available at That Every Man Be Armed.com

Good point about the “Colt Sporter” but some early model AR-15’s were bought & used by the military. A
nother good point about US vs Miller, I brought that up alot in comment sections when that old senile judge ruled on the AR-15 ban in MA. That should be easily overturned.

I received a notification that ‘no’ said “Jews are the ones pushing gun control. Just look at who owns the left wing news outlets, who is always publishing anti-gun opinion pieces, who is organizing protests.
Remember, with jews you lose.”
I don’t see the message here, but in any event, ‘no;’ I recommend you visit the Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership at http://www.jpfo.org. Don’t paint all Jews with a bigoted brush. JPFO has compiled and published an incredible amount of factual information about the nine major genocides in the last 100+ years, every one of which was preceded by registration, licensing, restrictions, banning, and confiscation. They also have produced a plethora of DVD documentaries like “No Guns For Negroes;” “No Guns For Jews;” “Innocents Betrayed” about the illegal thuggery going on at the ATF, and others. Very pro-gun outfit, and constantly asking their fellow Jews, who oppose the right to keep and bear arms, the question “So what does ‘Never Again’ mean if you are going to let it happen again?”

I’m a non-Jew living in a predominantly Orthodox Jewish neighborhood on the west side of Denver. Many of my Jewish neighbors have concealed carry permits and are regularly and lawfully armed. They totally had my back when I survived a self-defense shooting at my home in 2014. The bad guy didn’t! I wouldn’t trade my Jewish neighbors for anyone!

Jews are mostly libtards and vote that way (easily shown) but not all of them. Almost the same with people from CA, HI, MN, RI, CT, MA, NJ, NY. A lot of simple people prefer black & white to reality’s grey shades.

You would be surprised how many Californians who live outside the LA and SF areas are clinging to our guns just as Americans in any other state. Many assume what LA and SF want is what the rest of the state wants but that is far from true. When you go inland and north of Sacramento you have farmland. We have gun clubs, free gun ranges on BLM and State land, hunting clubs and we even have gun shows. When I’m at the range I remind other shooters that they need to vote so our 2nd amendment won’t get carved up even more than it is already. As strict as California gun laws are I legally purchased an AK47 just last week. I also legally own an AR15 along with a Mini 14, a Mossburg 500 and 410, an XD 9 and a Sig P238. A large part of the state voted Trump in the last election. Remember that the media has the loudest voice so that’s what people in other states hear. They don’t hear the true voice of the many California gun owners.

So, I’m seeing ALL of these claims yet no one is supporting them them evidence. Rather reverberating what we read in opinionated articles and online platitudes, why don’t we spread the truth through undeniable evidence.

“1956 Seeing possibility in the AR-10 design, the Army asks ArmaLite to work on a smaller caliber version to be named the AR 15 Rifle. The project is exploratory, as the military doctrine of the time called for large caliber rifles to be used in engagements at longer distances.”

So the weapon was built for the military. NOT civilians. I still agree that this means it is even more protected, however, check your facts!

Those were for LE and export early Model 613s, Colt stopped marking them that way around the 4.5 million serial number. They were M-16 receivers but not intended for the US military, who ended up with some anyway. The military would have stamped the M16A1 and US Property marks on them.

This is the part that pisses me off the most!! (Take for instance the words of Tench Coxe, Founding Father and delegate from Pennsylvania to the Continental Congress. “Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords and every terrible implement of the soldier are the birthright of Americans. “ Tench Coxe 1788) Never at any time should Congress have been allowed to put restrictions on GOOD people with guns! America should have become like Switzerland where every household is issued a weapon, and knows how to use it. If you don’t, then do not whine if someone comes into your house uninvited!!

I agree 100% Congress has no right to say that Americans can’t have firearms (my time in the military has my vocabulary like this), and when it comes to the people that are all to willing to give up that right. When they do have someone enter their house uninvited I have a feeling they might be thinking “if I only had a gun” (to the toon of wizard of OZ if I only had a brain).

I don’t know what happened to the message I just posted, but it disappeared along with several other comments by others. Now there are only three. So I will repeat myself:
AAAHHHH! I have been yelling at the gun-banners for years now that the Second Amendment applies SPECIFICALLY to military-grade firearms; THAT’S WHY THE FOUNDING FATHERS RECOGNIZED OUR RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS! TO PROTECT OUR RIGHT TO MILITARY-GRADE FIREARMS.
Don’t call me a dumbass; I am making liberal heads explode!

@Dan, It is a made up term. Marketers us it to sell things. Libtards use it to scare uninformed people. The closest real term that I can think of, where it may have come from, is weapons grade or military grade uranium.

I have also noticed the prevalence of “assault style” firearms being singled out for infringing legislation. This is an “improvement” in calling them “assault” weapons, which they are not. However, the Heller decision addresses “assault style” firearms (those in common use) as being protected by the Second Amendment. Actual assault weapons, such as the M16 with its fully automatic mode, may be regulated.

“Actual assault weapons, such as the M16 with its fully automatic mode, may be regulated.”

Really? Where does it say that in either the Constitution or the Bill of Rights or, specifically, the 2nd Amendment? FYI, the U.S. Attorney-General in 1934 said the National Firearms Act, restricting full-auto weapons, was unconstitutional. And Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, (1914) says the 2nd Amendment applies to all the weapons carried by the typical well-equipped infantryman. Under the constraints of the 32nd, 4th, 5th, 9th, and 10th Amendments, the federal government has no authority whatever — none, zip, zilch — over the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms, and the State governments, while having the Police Power to regulate the USE of arms in the interests of public safety, are prohibited the exercise of authority prohibited by the U.S. Constitution.

We’re already being suckered by illegal background checks violating our 2nd, 4th, 5th, 9th, and 10th Amendment protected rights; if we don’t start demanding the government at all levels obey the U.S. Constitution we are going to lose it all.

Maybe you should do some research yourself. A 1972 military training manual titled “Introduction to Leadership Development. Reserve Officers Training Corps Manual” which was written by the Department of the Army for the members of the Reserve Officers Training Corps says this about the history of the M16A1 rifle:
“The US Army’s newest rifle, in its arsenal of small arms, is the M16A1. This rifle was developed by the Armalite Division of Fairchild Stratos Corporation in 1957, at the request of the United States Continental Army Command. In 1962 the Department of the Army directed that the M16A1 (then known as the AR-15) be evaluated in light of certain new rifle characteristics being sought, specifically a rifle that was easy to handle in jungle or heavily vegetated terrain and a lightweight rifle which could be used by new units such as Air Assault Divisions in which weight is a critical factor. Based on the findings of this evaluation approximately 85,000 of these rifles were purchased initially. With modifications, the AR-15 was standardized for the Army as the M16A1.”https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED068784.pdf

So the weapon was designed for the U.S. military at the request of the U.S. military. This is only a freaction of the evidence I have but is the most direct.

This is not allowed all semantics. He says the weapon was built for civilians when in fact it was built for the military. However, you absolutely right. I am very much a supporter of the civilian right to own these weapons. In fact, the Supreme Court, as he correctly states, supports this in there opinons of Miller and Heller.

@JC
You should do some research of your own !
Many Manufacturing companys built m16s .
Hydro matics (gm) ,Colt ,H&R,FN, & even Daewoo
had a hand in their Manufacturing. And Yes !
Mattel did make Plastics in the begining.
There are more non-gun makers who made
parts for them to keep up with the demand
for the war effort . Ive held some in my own
hands for over 2yrs, And you ?

That’s not exactly the case. Stoner designed the AR-15 hoping to sell it to the military, the military had no input on the initial design. The Army tested some AR-15s a couple years later and rejected them as unsuitable for military service. Then the Air Force got involved, and the Army again. After numerous design changes requested by the Army the new rifle was named the M-16.

The guns designed by Stoner for Armalite were re-designed at the request of the Air Force and Army to make the acceptable for military procurement. MilSpecincludes every detail from metal alloys and heat treatment to parts sizes, bore diameter, service life, ease of repair in the field or depot…
The ATF required Colt to redesign the lower receiver so that the parts needed for full automatic firing cannot be installed.
If you are disarmed by the government [at any level] and somebody with a 1775 muzzle loading flintlock shoots you you’re just as dead as if you were shot with a 2018 handgun, rifle or shotgun.

If it Say’s MATTEL on it !
Is it still Military Grade ?
Some of the Plastics way back
on the First Issued M16 s
Had Mattel embossed on them !
What about the GM M16 s
Is My Car Military Grade ?
or My Kids Air soft gun ?

Painting with an awfully broad brush aren’t we? I’m a Marine and a Jew, and don’t believe in “gun control” yet you claim “Jews are the ones pushing gun control”.Like all humans some think one way and others are opposed to those ideas.